{
  "id": 3618291,
  "name": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LOUIS THOMA, Defendant-Appellee",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Thoma",
  "decision_date": "1988-06-24",
  "docket_number": "No. 3-87-0793",
  "first_page": "313",
  "last_page": "315",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "171 Ill. App. 3d 313"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "394 N.E.2d 63",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "75 Ill. App. 3d 503",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3276213
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/75/0503-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "222 N.E.2d 508",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "509"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "78 Ill. App. 2d 356",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        2568060
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "358"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-2d/78/0356-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "504 N.E.2d 539",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "152 Ill. App. 3d 374",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3576588
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/152/0374-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 314,
    "char_count": 4913,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.771,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.470291726553117e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3986056716047924
    },
    "sha256": "15e3b5f010c5681faf962484c7cb2d78a50497b41bbbae9040b8b64bd20f550f",
    "simhash": "1:93641b9dc44bd845",
    "word_count": 826
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:35:27.168167+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LOUIS THOMA, Defendant-Appellee."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "JUSTICE SCOTT\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nThe defendant, Louis Thoma, was charged with soliciting for a prostitute (111. Rev. Stat. 1985, ch. 38, par. 11 \u2014 15(a)(1)) and attempted patronizing a prostitute (111. Rev. Stat. 1985, ch. 38, pars. 8\u2014 4(a), 11 \u2014 18). The trial court granted the defendant\u2019s motion to dismiss the solicitation charge. The People appealed the dismissal of the solicitation charge. This court affirmed the trial court\u2019s order dismissing the solicitation charge. People v. Thoma (1987), 152 Ill. App. 3d 374, 504 N.E.2d 539.\nAfter this court\u2019s mandate issued, the trial court redocketed this case and proceeded against the defendant on the charge of attempted patronizing a prostitute. After hearing, the trial court dismissed this charge and this appeal ensued.\nThe sole issue in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in dismissing count II of the information, which charges the defendant with attempted patronizing a prostitute.\nClearly it is an offense for an individual to patronize a prostitute. (111. Rev. Stat. 1985, ch. 38, par. 11 \u2014 18.) The People do not claim that defendant patronized a prostitute but do argue that he committed the offense of attempted patronization of a prostitute in violation of section 8 \u2014 4 of the Criminal Code of 1961 (111. Rev. Stat. 1985, ch. 38, par. 8 \u2014 4), which provides:\n\u201cSec. 8 \u2014 4. Attempt.\n(a) Elements of the Offense.\nA person commits an attempt when, with intent to commit a specific offense, he does any act which constitutes a substantial step toward the commission of that offense.\u201d\nIn determining whether the defendant violated the attempt statute it is necessary that a recitation of the pertinent facts be set forth.\nThe defendant\u2019s difficulties began on September 26, 1985, at approximately 1:45 in the afternoon when in the City of Peoria he encountered a female undercover police officer who was posing as a prostitute. The defendant parked his vehicle and at that time the disguised police officer walked to the driver\u2019s side of defendant\u2019s vehicle. After a brief conversation, the defendant asked, \u201cWhat do you charge?\u201d The officer responded, \u201cWhat do you want?\u201d The defendant again asked the officer what she charged. He then asked her, \u201cHow much for a blow job?\u201d The officer said, \u201cWell, what is it worth to you?\u201d The defendant replied that he did not know and the officer said, \u201cWhat do you usually pay for it?\u201d The defendant stated that he had never paid for it before and then said, \u201cHow about $20.00?\u201d The officer then stated, \u201cYou want a blow job for $20.00?\u201d and defendant said \u201cYes.\u201d The officer then asked the defendant to show her the money but he did not do so. He did not indicate whether he had the money. The defendant was then arrested by another officer and was told that he was under arrest for attempting to patronize a prostitute.\nThe above-stated facts must be examined in light of the statutory language that an attempt is committed when an individual has intent to commit an offense and he does any act which constitutes a substantial step toward the commission of the offense.\nIt is well established:\n\u201cTwo elements must be present to constitute an attempt: (1) an intent to commit a specific offense, and (2) an act which is a substantial step towards it commission.\u201d People v. Paluch (1966), 78 Ill. App. 2d 356, 358, 222 N.E.2d 508, 509.\nSee also People v. Brown (1979), 75 Ill. App. 3d 503, 394 N.E.2d 63.\nIn the instant case there is no factual basis indicating that defendant was within dangerous proximity of successfully performing the act of patronizing a prostitute. The defendant may well have had the intent to perform the act. \u201cIntent\u201d in and of itself, standing alone, does not constitute a crime. The defendant did not tender or display any money. He did not agree to pay any money in exchange for sexual favors. He refused to show the police officer his money when she requested to see the same. The defendant did not exit his automobile, nor did the police officer enter it. She was not invited to enter the vehicle.\nThere was no overt act or substantial step made by the defendant toward the commission of the offense of attempted patronization of a prostitute. No criminal act occurred even though the undercover police officer gave the defendant every opportunity to commit such an act. The defendant\u2019s conduct was mere speech which did not approach the required specificity of a \u201csubstantial step.\u201d\nFor the reasons set forth the judgment of the circuit court of Peoria County is affirmed.\nAffirmed.\nHEIPLE and WOMBACHER, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "JUSTICE SCOTT"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "John A. Barra, State\u2019s Attorney, of Peoria (Gary F. Gnidovec, of State\u2019s Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor\u2019s Office, of counsel), for the People.",
      "James L. Hafele, of Peoria, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LOUIS THOMA, Defendant-Appellee.\nThird District\nNo. 3-87-0793\nOpinion filed June 24, 1988.\nJohn A. Barra, State\u2019s Attorney, of Peoria (Gary F. Gnidovec, of State\u2019s Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor\u2019s Office, of counsel), for the People.\nJames L. Hafele, of Peoria, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0313-01",
  "first_page_order": 335,
  "last_page_order": 337
}